10 ms·
In this case, the western intelligence organizations were spot on from several weeks ago. Biden played it as well as he could, reserving some further sanctions
by noduerme 5y ago
In this case, the western intelligence organizations were spot on from several weeks ago. Biden played it as well as he could, reserving some further sanctions until this happened. I lived through the "Iraq has WMD" build-up and lies, and I thought they were lies then, before we went in and found out there were no WMD. This was good intelligence.
Unfortunately, it does no one any good. All we can do at the moment is sanction Russia. But it does argue that we should be prepared for a nuclear response if they cross any line west, as long as Putin or some other madman is in power there.
- rayiner 5y agoUsing nuclear power if Putin crosses into Eastern Europe is complete madness. Eastern Europe is Russia’s back yard, not ours.
- noduerme 5y agoNothing is Russia's back yard. Russia is the back yard. Russia is the graveyard of civilization, which has no claim to anything outside its miserable, ruthless territory. I would rather die than live in a shithole under Putin. The only madness would be not using nuclear weapons against Putin if he crosses NATO lines. If he wants to die rich, he can live a long life. Otherwise let him die with his missiles, and his daughter who dances.
- polotics 5y agoWord! The backyard of a sad Mafia of outdated old Russian men still stuck in the 20th century. As things stand my guess is this lasts about five years and ends with some nuclear exchange over Europe, assassinations across the West and East, and prude dove China slowwwwly crawling east, then south, north, west.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- slibhb 5y agoRussia isn't going to cross NATO lines. Even if they do, NATO can defeat the Russians without nuclear weapons. I can't believe I have to say it but escalating to a nuclear war is a horrible idea.
- codehalo 5y agoThe problem is Russia can't defeat NATO without nuclear weapons.
- evan_ 5y agoWhat's stopping Russia from introducing nuclear weapons in that case?
- Tainnor 5y agoProbably MAD, as in the Cold War times. There's still the hope that nobody, not even an imperialist Putin, would be willing to risk the total destruction of his own country if not of human civilization over some territorial ambitions.
- aenis 5y agoWhat if he is actually mad? Maybe terminally ill and not minding the scorched earth he'd leave behind? Luckily, this is Russia. There is always someone willing to stab the tzsar in the back when the time comes.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago"What if he is actually mad? Maybe terminally ill and not minding the scorched earth he'd leave behind?" So the solution of the OP is to be madder than him and start nuclear war first? I wish there were someone to replace the mad tzar, its long overdue
- dekhn 5y agoI would say, so far Putin is proceeding rationally. He prepared his economy for this over many years, made strategic agreements with opponents of the West, and slowly built up a force which will now take a neighboring country using classic military techniques and massive imbalance of power.
- baq 5y agoI live in an independent country thanks to NATO and EU. This place used to be Russia's back yard for 50 years. I'd like it to remain not-Russia's back yard, thankyouverymuch.
- symlinkk 5y agoUkraine is not part of NATO. It’s not our job.
- Eldt 5y ago"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"
- jacquesm 5y agoWhat is so weird about these things: every time you read a history book you go like 'Oh, I recognize that', and then it plays out exactly the same. This whole wave of isolationism and so called neutrality was an important factor in why WWII went as far as it did, if the world had stood united against Hitler/Germany from day #1 he would have had not nearly gone as far.
- rayiner 5y agoNot everything is an analogy to WWII.
- rayiner 5y agoCountries tending to their own border security isn’t a matter of “good” and “evil.” Russia has far more basis for invading a rapidly arming country on its own border than the US did for invading Iraq or Afghanistan or Vietnam or Korea.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- 5y ago
- jacquesm 5y ago> Eastern Europe is Russia’s back yard, not ours. Wow, this must be a new low in these threads. No, Eastern Europe is Europe's 'backyard', and in fact it isn't a backyard. Romania, Poland, the Baltics, Hungary, Czechia, and so on are all solidly part of Europe.
- rayiner 5y agoThat’s not how geopolitics works. I’m from Bangladesh—we’re sure as heck India’s back yard.
- jacquesm 5y agoWhere you are from is no excuse for what you wrote.
- rayiner 5y agoI’m explaining my context for why I think your point is wrong. As I recall, you’re from a little European country that thinks it has inviolable “sovereignty.” In reality you exist because Germany or France haven’t wanted to take you over recently. Countries exist amongst each other in a state of anarchy. Bangladeshis are just closer to that reality. We haven’t had as much time to cloud the reality with fantasies about “international law.”
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- hammock 5y agoWhat are you taking offense to, his idea that Russia and Eastern Europe are neighbors (which seems objectively true)? Or idea that the US should not involve itself in Eastern Europe-Russian disputes?
- jacquesm 5y agoThe term backyard implies a proprietary relationship, Ukraine isn't part of Russia's backyard and hasn't been for a long time now, and in the minds of the Ukrainians has never been part of Russia's backyard. The fact that the OP believes this to be so belies even the most basic insight into the reality for millions of people in former USSR countries who have in living memory what it means to be part of Russia's backyard and what the price to them would be if those days were to return. Calling Siberia or Kamchatka Russia's backyard might be accurate. But just like Canada isn't America's backyard neither is Ukraine - or any other former USSR vassal state - Russia's backyard. Neighbors is an entirely different term. As for Europe-Russian disputes, there is such a thing as NATO, which was good enough to be relied on after 9/11, I take it that it is still in force? If not can you point me to the news that I apparently missed?
- a-and 5y agoThis is certainly a ... reductionist view on geopolitics. Not only does this assume everyone in the thread is American, but also completely disregards the sovereignty and historic significance of many Eastern European countries.
- rayiner 5y agoYou mean realist. A country’s sovereignty matters only as much as it’s ability to defend it (or the willingness of someone else to do so out of their own interests). My own country only exists because India wanted to get back at Pakistan and helped us in our independence war. If they hadn’t, we’d still be part of Pakistan—which would be what it would be.
- chasd00 5y agoNuclear response means escalation to global nuclear war. That's every worst nightmare come true and puts civilization itself at risk. “I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”
- mcguire 5y agoMy understanding at this point is that Russia has destroyed Ukraine's air defenses and has complete air superiority. Western forces could contest that, but won't because that could cause unintended escalation.
- Mikeb85 5y ago> Biden played it as well as he could Biden played it like shit. If they had never warned of war maybe Putin could have saved face. Instead Biden antogonized Russia, pledged support to Ukraine but didn't actually do anything. They sold out Ukraine. They wanted Ukrainians to do what, fight and die? What good was US intelligence? The US isn't doing shit...
- darkarmani 5y ago> Instead Biden antogonized Russia How exactly did he antagonize Russia? > The US isn't doing shit... What do you want the US to be doing? Are these actions feasible?
- Mikeb85 5y ago> What do you want the US to be doing? Are these actions feasible? Nothing because it's too late. But had the west given some concrete promises to Ukraine, I don't know at any time in the last few years, do you really think Russia would have invaded? > How exactly did he antagonize Russia? Really? He kept threatening sanctions, kept saying the invasion was happening... Even Zelenskiy told Biden to stop... Edit - now Biden is gloating about being right, talking about sanctions but not helping Ukraine Edit2 - Biden's press conference is so bad SMH... Hahaha Biden just said the sanctions will be just as bad as Russian missiles are to Ukraine. Clown world...
- evan_ 5y ago> Nothing because it's too late. But had the west given some concrete promises to Ukraine, I don't know at any time in the last few years, do you really think Russia would have invaded? What specifically do you mean by "concrete promises"? The US has been sending military aid to Ukraine for years. Trump tried to withhold it but was eventually forced to send it anyway, it was a pretty big story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump%E2%80%93Ukraine_scandal#Withholding_of_Ukrainian_military_aid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump%E2%80%93Ukraine_scandal#...
- 5y ago
- stickfigure 5y agoThe west is - still - perfectly capable of intervening militarily without invoking nuclear weapons. Does it have the courage to do so? I don't know.
- robbedpeter 5y agoPutin escalated to nuclear threats already. There's ww3 potential now.
- stickfigure 5y agoOf course he did. And he'll threaten the same thing the next time wants another piece of Europe. There's zero reason to believe him; he wants to live too. More importantly, the vast bureaucracy that supports him wants to live.
- jacquesm 5y agoHe's quite literally 'all in', which also means that he has nowhere to run now, Russia is from here on forward until Putin has been replaced, either from without or within a pariah state.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- toyg 5y agoI reckon Biden made one big mistake, and it was to pressure the Germans to block NordStream2. This pre-dates recent events, the pipeline has been effectively ready for a pretty long time - it had long become clear the "technical" delays were anything but. It irritated the Russian kleptocrats, who live off Gazprom, making a military move over Ukraine much more likely.
- darthrupert 5y agoThere's one thing, though: if Putin tried this again, we know that the US is telling the truth about it.